Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

I not am talking about the Iranian earthquake. Where the hell did you get that from?

..

Sorry, my mistake. I was watching a BBC report on the earthquake in Iran at the time and they had footage of what looked like an explosion in a quarry. But it was probably just dust being thrown up.
Too much multi-tasking..

But the fact is, Iraquis killing Iraquis over religion is no longer very newsworthy.
A new style of terror at a big sporting event is.

__________________JOIN THE CHURCH OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER TODAY

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

Obviously. And this is what the Western media essentially does. Likewise, media in the Middle East or Eastern Asia wouldn't as extensively cover the event as Western media has. Therefore, no "lives" mean more than anyone else. It's merely a superficial fixation that depends on location and perspective. That was my initial point.

Fair point I guess. Media will prioritize whatever topics they find pertinent, and since Western media are usually biggest/most powerful, it will inevitable create an impression that their view is the world view as well, which isn't really true.

__________________“There’s so many athletes, tennis players around the world,” he continued, trying to put his life into some kind of perspective, “they want to be the best in what they do. They want to succeed. Many of them, they don’t succeed in the end. I’m fortunate to have this opportunity and succeed.”

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Time Violation

Fair point I guess. Media will prioritize whatever topics they find pertinent, and since Western media are usually biggest/most powerful, it will inevitable create an impression that their view is the world view as well, which isn't really true.

It has nothing to do with power, but merely how cultural and social frameworks operate. The Western media fixate extensively on events that happen in the West because there is an underlying sense of duty for the media to report on these issues. What bothers me is how the media tend to neglect many important international sociopolitical issues that would nonetheless warrant ideal coverage had it happened in the West. The integrity of journalism is falling at a rapid rate because they tend to only cover first-world issues (with some exceptions, of course). This mentality, therefore, creates a blockade, where other information isn't delivered to the public because the mainstream media neglects to address them. As a result, a great portion of the population become oblivious.

Thank God we've got the internet and newspapers - platforms that showcases independent and investigative journalism. Without it, my knowledge of world events would be strictly Western.

Again, this is not fault of Western media only but also media from the Middle East and Eastern Asia. Mainstream media in the West have a great deal of Islamophobia in their reports. Likewise, Middle Eastern and some Asian media has a great deal of anti-West, anti-American, anti-Imperialism tones in their reports, particularly in North Korea, where the state-owned media degrade America and its allies at every opportunity possible.

Back on point, the only reason why certain people think our lives are more important in the first-world is because of the media's shocking ability to create that distortion. When, in reality, the importance of one life over another is immeasurable and impracticable, because perspectives constantly change, most likely depending on your location, your culture and your social obligations (i.e., cultural and social frameworks - what I mentioned earlier).

__________________

Tomic [tom-ic] [tom-ic-ing]verb
1. apply yourself for a small period of time before giving up. (I am tomicing this match). noun
2. play exceedingly well for a month and then give fallacious promises to the world. (He performed a Tomic)

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddyholly

But the fact is, Iraquis killing Iraquis over religion is no longer very newsworthy.
A new style of terror at a big sporting event is.

On the day of the Sandy Hook massacre, a Chinese man entered a public school, in China, and stabbed 22 people, ranging from elderly women to children. This received little coverage mostly because of the shocking events that transpired at Sandy Hook, similar to the lack of coverage in Iraq due to the Boston Marathon. By your logic, the reason as to why this event was seldom covered (and, if it were, awfully vaguely) is because the event does not constitue a...newsworthy value?

__________________

Tomic [tom-ic] [tom-ic-ing]verb
1. apply yourself for a small period of time before giving up. (I am tomicing this match). noun
2. play exceedingly well for a month and then give fallacious promises to the world. (He performed a Tomic)

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Well, power too - far more people have heard/know what CNN or BBC is, than what's top portal in Iran or Pakistan. Not to mention that even if you're not from the West, your 2nd language is most likely to be English, so again more power to Western media. If you would want to hear all bits and pieces about whatever that happened in (for example) Serbia, you would definitely need to know Serbian language, otherwise you would have to depend on the info either from Western media or from Serbian media available in English, which is usually far less detailed than the native version.

__________________“There’s so many athletes, tennis players around the world,” he continued, trying to put his life into some kind of perspective, “they want to be the best in what they do. They want to succeed. Many of them, they don’t succeed in the end. I’m fortunate to have this opportunity and succeed.”

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Castafiore

The reason why 9/11 had a bigger impact than the attacks in London and Madrid (and they were huge, they should not be diminshed) is because the 9/11 was on US soil. Let me try to explain what I mean.

The USA had not seen war or such a vicious attack from a foreign entity on US soil. It was a first.

The UK had experienced IRA attacks in recent history. Spain had experienced ETA attacks in recent history.

The fact that 9/11 got more attention had to do, in part, with people being shocked that the USA was no longer a safe haven. Not that some people didn't realise that, the government has taken quite a few measures to increase safety but 9/11 made it real, it brought it home.

People in the UK and in Spain didn't need reminding. The scars of terrorist attacks are still fresh. People were used to a thing or two there.

I don't think I can agree with you. The World Trade Centers were bombed in 1993 in an effort to bring them down, but the bombs weren't big enough. Yet it was big enough to kill 6 and injure 1000. It was certainly unsettling, but it didn't stop people from going back to work there. Furthermore, most people have no idea what date it occurred on.

I think 9/11 got more attention because it killed as many as it did and the visual of watching a structure that large go down, not because of the location (that is not to say it being American didn't increase the coverage a bit, but I believe that happening anywhere would have gotten a massive worldwide reaction).

If someone brought down the Eiffel Tower tomorrow it would probably be remembered better than anything in London and Madrid (even if the death toll wasn't as big) because of the visual of that structure (particularly an iconic one) being decimated.

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

On the day of the Sandy Hook massacre, a Chinese man entered a public school, in China, and stabbed 22 people, ranging from elderly women to children. This received little coverage mostly because of the shocking events that transpired at Sandy Hook, similar to the lack of coverage in Iraq due to the Boston Marathon. By your logic, the reason as to why this event was seldom covered (and, if it were, awfully vaguely) is because the event does not constitue a...newsworthy value?

That is my logic, exactly.
It may be newsworthy in China, but honestly, what happens in rural China is not of much interest to me. And the New York Times probably does not sell very well in rural China. Sandy Hook was much closer to "home" and therefore of much more interest to me.
It is not the job of the Western media to give every happening in the world the same coverage. If 22 people in a Melbourne school had been stabbed the same day as the attack in China do you really think the Australian newspapers should have given equal coverage to the Chinese event? Of course not. That is not how Australians would rate the importance of the events.
The media, like any other commodity, tries to provide the public what it will buy. And these days you can buy just about anything. And like the remote control for your TV, you can block what you don't want. It is a long way better than state controlled media. Which, in theory, would be the only way to guarantee equal coverage of everything in the world. Except, in practice, it is perfectly obvious that a state controlled media is a lot more biased than a free media.

__________________JOIN THE CHURCH OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER TODAY

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddyholly

That is my logic, exactly.
It may be newsworthy in China, but honestly, what happens in rural China is not of much interest to me. And the New York Times probably does not sell very well in rural China. Sandy Hook was much closer to "home" and therefore of much more interest to me.
It is not the job of the Western media to give every happening in the world the same coverage. If 22 people in a Melbourne school had been stabbed the same day as the attack in China do you really think the Australian newspapers should have given equal coverage to the Chinese event? Of course not. That is not how Australians would rate the importance of the events.
The media, like any other commodity, tries to provide the public what it will buy. And these days you can buy just about anything. And like the remote control for your TV, you can block what you don't want. It is a long way better than state controlled media. Which, in theory, would be the only way to guarantee equal coverage of everything in the world. Except, in practice, it is perfectly obvious that a state controlled media is a lot more biased than a free media.

I'm struggling to understand why you are associating the country "China" with the word "rural". China is becoming an increasingly urban and industrialised nation. Besides, your initial post implied that it is the merit behind actions which constitues whether a story is newsworthy or not, not the location. For example, you said (and I quote) the idea of...

Quote:

Iraquis killing Iraquis over religion is no longer very newsworthy.
A new style of terror at a big sporting event is.

Are you telling me that a Chinese man, entering a public school, stabbing 22 children and elderly women is no longer considered very newsworthy? This can be seen as "a new style of terror" at a public, supposedly safe educational institution, in a Communist country where the possession of firearms and other lethal weapons are extremely inaccessible. So what exactly are you proposing? Is it the merit behind the event that constitues the issue being newsworthy or the geographical location?

As for the rest of your post, you've basically said the media is essentially an example of corporate capitalism, something in which I agree with, so no arguments there.

__________________

Tomic [tom-ic] [tom-ic-ing]verb
1. apply yourself for a small period of time before giving up. (I am tomicing this match). noun
2. play exceedingly well for a month and then give fallacious promises to the world. (He performed a Tomic)

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

I'm struggling to understand why you are associating the country "China" with the word "rural". China is becoming an increasingly urban and industrialised nation. Besides, your initial post implied that it is the merit behind actions which constitues whether a story is newsworthy or not, not the location. For example, you said (and I quote) the idea of...

Are you telling me that a Chinese man, entering a public school, stabbing 22 children and elderly women is no longer considered very newsworthy? This can be seen as "a new style of terror" at a public, supposedly safe educational institution, in a Communist country where the possession of firearms and other lethal weapons are extremely inaccessible. So what exactly are you proposing? Is it the merit behind the event that constitues the issue being newsworthy or the geographical location?

As for the rest of your post, you've basically said the media is essentially an example of corporate capitalism, something in which I agree with, so no arguments there.

I do not understand why you are struggling with the concept that the location of a village in Central China could be described as rural China.I did not associate the country China with the word rural. I associated a rural part of China with the word rural.I specifically associated the village where the stabbings took place with "rural". If the stabbings had been in a Hong Kong or Beijing hotel I would definitely not have referred to the location as rural and I might have read more, because I might be there sometime. But a village in the countryside - I think not.
And these kinds of stabbings have become fairly common in China - there is not much new in them. They are typically carried out by mentally disturbed people. I would not class them as a new class of terrorist attack at all.
So I am exactly proposing that a rampage by a mentally disturbed man in rural China is of little interest to me, neither in merit or geographical location. It will not affect my life. A terrorist attack in Boston will.

And again, if you don't like capitalist media, Granma is available online. You can even subscribe. But don't count on extensive news coverage of a rampage by a mentally disturbed man in a Communist country. I am sure the corporate capitalist western media gave that story a lot more coverage than Granma did.

__________________JOIN THE CHURCH OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER TODAY

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

I don't read American papers or watch American tv because I don't care about American daily events. But since so many movies take place in these famous USA places I am interested when something happens there.

If you are not interested why seek out western media stories?

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by tribalfusion

In fact, he may be the one poster here who fails more than you do. Maybe we should all keep that in mind: there is bigger fail than Word Life/Danger Ehren...and its name is Glenn

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

On the day of the Sandy Hook massacre, a Chinese man entered a public school, in China, and stabbed 22 people, ranging from elderly women to children. This received little coverage mostly because of the shocking events that transpired at Sandy Hook, similar to the lack of coverage in Iraq due to the Boston Marathon. By your logic, the reason as to why this event was seldom covered (and, if it were, awfully vaguely) is because the event does not constitue a...newsworthy value?

Seriously? I remember reading about the incident in china that very day. The article described that incident and others that had taken place in china. I remarked on it to myself because I thought how much havoc guns wreaked. It was horrific that so many children were cruelly injured but at least none of them died. If the man had used a gun, there would have been many dead children.

As I said, I don't watch TV news, so maybe I have more time to see and read these stories,

Also, we, thankfully, don't know what the coverage might have been if these children had been killed. And also, also, you and I knew about this incident at the time, so I assume others did as well,

P.S. I wonder if the story a week or so ago about the man who went to a community college in Texas and stabbed students got any coverage in your country. It got little in this country.

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by star

Seriously? I remember reading about the incident in china that very day. The article described that incident and others that had taken place in china. I remarked on it to myself because I thought how much havoc guns wreaked. It was horrific that so many children were cruelly injured but at least none of them died. If the man had used a gun, there would have been many dead children.

As I said, I don't watch TV news, so maybe I have more time to see and read these stories,

Also, we, thankfully, don't know what the coverage might have been if these children had been killed. And also, also, you and I knew about this incident at the time, so I assume others did as well,

P.S. I wonder if the story a week or so ago about the man who went to a community college in Texas and stabbed students got any coverage in your country. It got little in this country.

Ironically,the Chinese media focused more on the incident in USA rather than the one happened in our own country.

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

western press report more about western issues shocker

of course this is true.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiebreak100

A dishwasher has more personality than Sampras.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SliceAce

As for Mugray, what can be said? A disgusting human being, and awful player, and a choking pushing mug. He looks like a kemo patient, bald spots, hairless legs, pasty blotchy skin, busted teeth, and an ugly, snarling face. Typical antics all came out in this match: faking injuries, grimacing and cursing, trying to peg Fed, trying to start drama, undeserved final based on an exhausted old man and a joke draw.

I'm no Fakervic fan but he needs to save tennis, sadly tree trunk legs will be fresh. Interesting he's never questioned...

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by buddyholly

I do not understand why you are struggling with the concept that the location of a village in Central China could be described as rural China.I did not associate the country China with the word rural. I associated a rural part of China with the word rural.I specifically associated the village where the stabbings took place with "rural". If the stabbings had been in a Hong Kong or Beijing hotel I would definitely not have referred to the location as rural and I might have read more, because I might be there sometime. But a village in the countryside - I think not.
And these kinds of stabbings have become fairly common in China - there is not much new in them. They are typically carried out by mentally disturbed people. I would not class them as a new class of terrorist attack at all.
So I am exactly proposing that a rampage by a mentally disturbed man in rural China is of little interest to me, neither in merit or geographical location. It will not affect my life. A terrorist attack in Boston will.

And again, if you don't like capitalist media, Granma is available online. You can even subscribe. But don't count on extensive news coverage of a rampage by a mentally disturbed man in a Communist country. I am sure the corporate capitalist western media gave that story a lot more coverage than Granma did.

You clearly use the word rural much more lightly than me. I'd never define that village with such a term. There is a common guarantee that if Americans were involved in the incident, the media would most likely saturate themselves in sentimentality and hyperbole. But because Americans are involved, it does interest people like you, in spite of the geographical location and merit behind such actions being exactly the same.

And your "Granma" example is laughable in the extreme, and frankly ignorant. I get my news from RT, a non-for-profit-organisation, funded by the Russian government, albeit with no journalistic influence. They cover world events far more objectively, minus all the preachy trite most of the population has grown accustom to, and certainly are not afraid to legitimately critique issues, people and countries that would otherwise be blanket in the mainstream media.

__________________

Tomic [tom-ic] [tom-ic-ing]verb
1. apply yourself for a small period of time before giving up. (I am tomicing this match). noun
2. play exceedingly well for a month and then give fallacious promises to the world. (He performed a Tomic)

Re: Are Western "first world country" lives seen as more valuable by the media?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mug

You clearly use the word rural much more lightly than me. I'd never define that village with such a term. There is a common guarantee that if Americans were involved in the incident, the media would most likely saturate themselves in sentimentality and hyperbole. But because Americans are involved, it does interest people like you, in spite of the geographical location and merit behind such actions being exactly the same.

And your "Granma" example is laughable in the extreme, and frankly ignorant. I get my news from RT, a non-for-profit-organisation, funded by the Russian government, albeit with no journalistic influence. They cover world events far more objectively, minus all the preachy trite most of the population has grown accustom to, and certainly are not afraid to legitimately critique issues, people and countries that would otherwise be blanket in the mainstream media.

Village and rural are practically synonymous. I don't get this irritation you have with calling a village in Central China rural.

Haha, I just flipped over to RT. There is some woman going on and on about the western media not providing the proper news. But she has no news of her own to offer. Instead she shows excerpts from CNN, FOX and MSNBC and then tells us what garbage they offer. She is funnier than John Stewart. RT could be my go to comedy station if it is always this funny.

If you really think that the Russian government funds RT and does not influence content, then you are not in the same universe as me. It is Pravda under a new name, that is all. The propaganda machine of Putin.

Right now she is doing a piece on the 9/11 conspiracy. HaHaHaHa. Very up to date.i

Oh, now a nice little bit about that wonderful man, Assad, in Syria.

Now we are hearing that Palestinians are subject to more apartheid than the South Africans were. It took all of 10 minutes for the anti-semitism to come out.

Ah, maybe I won't watch this garbage anymore. It has no news at all, just propaganda.

So she ends her little programme by telling us to tune out western news and listen to her Russian truths. Now I know where you guys get all this anti western media stuff. You just repeat what RT tells you. She has told me about 5 times in 20 minutes to stop watching western news and get the truth at RT. I am starting to worry that I am being brainwashed over the airwaves.

__________________JOIN THE CHURCH OF THE FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER TODAY